Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Strategery: What Direction Should We Be Taking?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-04-03 12:52 PM
Original message
Poll question: Strategery: What Direction Should We Be Taking?
The Democratic party is split (duh), but the root of our split really comes down to strategy. As an earlier thread pointed out, there are some core beliefs we can most all agree upon. Most of the struggle we face is to find that "magic bullet" that will shift the momentum and assure us a win. This is also the source of alot of our frustration about our party. But if we're able to find that winning strategy - or at least pick one and commit to it - I think most of us can agree we'd have scored a victory.

We all have ideas about the overall tone we should be setting in this upcoming election. I've listed a few that have popped up. Which one is the most important? Why? If the poll numbers skew overwhelmingly to one direction, is that something you could live with?

Explanation of the options:

1) Campaign to the Center
PROS: Rake in that "swing vote" & take some away from *.
CONS: Shift away from the core. "Bush-lite". Lose some from the left.

2) Consistently Oppose Republicans
PROS: Show of unity. Clear show of opposition.
CONS: Republicans will be setting our agenda: We'd stand against something, but not for anything.

3) Big Tent
PROS: Big numbers.
CONS: No hard stance. Could majorly backfire.

4) Campaign To The Left
PROS: Clear opposition. Embrace a core Labor/minority/antiwar platform.
CONS: Open to vicious attacks. Not taking away any * votes. There's no $$$ in it.

5) Campaign as Outsider/Reformers
PROS: Bring in the "fed up" & third party voters & non-voters.
CONS: At the possible expense of loyal Democrats.

6) Campaign to the South
PROS: Electoral Votes
CONS: Not in step with the rest of the country. Limited candidate choices. See #1.

7) Keep Doing What We're Doing
PROS: We're doing it already.
CONS: What exactly are we doing?

8) Get Behind Whichever Course The Nominee Sets
PROS: Show of unity. ABB.
CONS: Depends on the Nominee.

9) Clean House Within The Party
PROS: Reform. Regain trust.
CONS: Chaos. Show of weakness.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-04-03 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Wow -- These Results are a Surprise!
I didn't think the options were particularly stacked toward that answer, but it seems to resonate overwhelmingly here. I didn't even look at the results before voting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-04-03 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I'm Pretty Shocked Myself
I tried not to show bias...except against "keep doing what we're doing"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-04-03 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I seem to remember that shrub campaigned as a
Nonpartisan Outsider Reformer. (new tone to Washington blah, blah, blah...)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-04-03 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. *kick* for more votes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-04-03 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. Develop a Democratic Message and run with it
"Health Care for All" is a simple message that the GOPs will not be able to counter. This will connect with people all over the electorate (disregarding the right wing zealots).

There are other messages that would be simple and effective also.

I think the real challenges, like decreasing America's dependence on mideast oil will be much more difficult sale. Who really wants to tell America that they are going to have to quit buying their huge gas-hog trucks that they use for commuter cars? Personally, I think that automobile fuel efficiency standards are the most urgent public policy matter that needs to be dealt with, but the fossil fuel producers have so poisoned the debate, that we lose whenever we mention it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-04-03 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
6. For the Way-Homers
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 02:29 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC